Disqus - Friends of lancew

Re: http://blog.jamesurquhart.com/2008/11/in-cloud-computing-good-network-gives.html

jamesurquhart — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 11:22:22 -0000

Two places to pick up the conversation:

My new blog on CNET: http://news.cnet.com/the-wisdom-of-clouds
The Greg Ness founded http://infra20.com

Re: The Wisdom of Clouds is moving!!!

jamesurquhart — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 01:02:26 -0000

There are tradeoffs, to be sure. (For instance, I can't track my own traffic anymore, so I must break my statistical crack addiction.) However, in the long term it will be an invaluable venue. I hope to entice you to read as many as possible, but I, too, will miss the long-form feeds.

Thanks to you and all of the other gracious readers out there for turning what was just a place to vent into a community that I treasure and aim to serve the best I can.

Re: What is the value of IT convenience?

jamesurquhart — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 01:30:24 -0000

Well said, Steve. And I completely agree that IT is now under pressure to compete, not just serve. Let's see how the industry reacts, shall we? :-)

Your company/product naming comment is noted, and I made the correction.

Re: Do Your Cloud Applications Need To Be Elastic?

jamesurquhart — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:05:04 -0000

See, now that's an interesting use case.

Did you do a cost comparison compared to running virtual machines on your own infrastructure? Did you have your own infrastructure to start with?

Also, have you ever done a spreadsheet projection about your costs if you become wildly successful? Is there a tipping point where owning your own stuff starts to look more attractive? That's what Animoto was predicting a few months ago.

Thanks for the comment. I hadn't thought of this angle at all.

James

Re: Do Your Cloud Applications Need To Be Elastic?

jamesurquhart — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:03:28 -0000

No, but then the Amazon figures don't reflect administrative OPEX, security/patching OPEX, regulatory compliance OPEX, backup system OPEX (or possibly even CAPEX), et. al. Don't be fooled, Amazon just gives you some servers; you are still responsible for provisioning, monitoring, patching, securiting, assuring compliance, providing a backup plan should Amazon go down, etc., etc., etc. Developers think there is nothing to do once the server is provisioned. System administrators responsible for availability and compliance know much more is at stake.

Re: Do Your Cloud Applications Need To Be Elastic?

jamesurquhart — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 03:37:03 -0000

Again, if it doesn't need to be running all of the time (and you can remember to shut the dang thing off), it may be a candidate for EC2/S3. However, just note that there are 24X7 costs for every EC2 instance, whether it is on or not, in the form of S3/EBS.

I'm just warning people to do the math before committing to the cloud.

Re: Two Announcements to Pay Attention To This Week

jamesurquhart — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 01:49:15 -0000

Let me clarify what I meant. When you capture an image into Cassatt, it gets tweaked a little bit. Not much, just stripped of the source host's specific IP and host information, which is replaced with a placeholder so that it can be filled in with instance-specific information later. No one else uses this format for "stripping" server images. So, it is proprietary.

That being said, I completely agree that it is a "generalized" image protocol that allows users to store *any* software image (built on a supported OS) in the repository. Furthermore, Cassatt entirely uses standards, such as PXE and NFS, to deliver a completely "normal" file system to the target server, one which when delivered is impossible to distinguish from an image installed manually. So, in the end, for someone using only Cassatt, the image format is immaterial.

Finally, these images can be deployed equally well to both physical and virtual servers. This, it may turn out, could be the thing that softens my complaint...if a Cassatt image delivered to a VDC-OS infrastructure results in a VM that can be deployed equally well to a private or public cloud, then my point is moot. However, today there really isn't much portability outside of Cassatt private clouds--which is consistent with the state of the market.

I just know you guys, so I push you harder... :-)

Re: A Quick Guide To The "Big Four" Cloud Offerings

jamesurquhart — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:06:11 -0000

I can't find the reference, but I've heard that cloud marketing is the leading cause of death of keyboards in North America and Europe today. (Asian character set keyboards are somehow immune, perhaps because there is no character for "buaahahahaha!" in any eastern language.) This is why I type all of my blog posts on a five year old Panasonic Toughbook.

Seriously, though, feel free to extend the table. I have little doubt that you'll do so in the spirit of work...

James

Re: Overcast: Conversations on Cloud Computing

jamesurquhart — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:09:19 -0000

Thanks, Sam. Your input is greatly appreciated.

James

Re: Is Amazon in Danger of Becoming the WallMart of the Cloud?

jamesurquhart — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:37:14 -0000

Trevor,

An excellent post yourself...I like the application of the economies of scale argument to the concept of "big box clouds". In fact, I like your blog in general. I am now a subscriber.

James

Re: Is Amazon in Danger of Becoming the WallMart of the Cloud?

jamesurquhart — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 11:22:12 -0000

I'm sorry you see it that way. There is no element of globalization policy intended or, in my opinion, communicated in this post. It was a statement of a time in rural Iowa, and its *possible* analogy in the cloud. What happened, happened. In point of fact, most small towns survived Walmart, but many businesses didn't.

So its impossible that I tied Ylastic or any of these other companies with an opinion on anything but the disruptive nature of a "superstore" on competing small businesses. I've spoke with Ylastic's CTO, Prabhakar Chaganti, and I know how they are pitching their product. I stand by *my opinion* that Ylastic will find any Amazon-promoted GUI a challenge to their current model.

At worst, you can accuse me of being resistant to a valid disruptive business model. Which is probably fair. I may also be completely wrong.

Don't try to cast this as a political message that it is not. It distracts from the real question: is Amazon in danger of cannibalizing the entrepreneurial ecosystem of small businesses and startups that organically sprung up around it in the cloud?

Re: Amazon Enhances "The Proto-Cloud"

jamesurquhart — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:44:26 -0000

Paul,

Thanks for the kind words and great insight. I'll correct the root access reference.

Re: the "packaging" of services, I tend to thing "interactive AWS management console" (from Jeff's post) is a GUI. Would you agree? Does that not hint at the types of APIs you suggest?

James

Re: The PaaS Spectrum: Choosing Your Coding Cloud

jamesurquhart — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:06:50 -0000

Absolutely! And here's to PaaS vendors working together to allow that investment in programming and innovation to be portable to more than one vendor! ;-)

Re: The PaaS Spectrum: Choosing Your Coding Cloud

jamesurquhart — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:21:53 -0000

Which is great, and certainly a big effort saver for those looking to scale applications across tens or hundreds of systems. Not portable, though.

Tim Bray's site has an interesting discussion about this right now: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2008/10/...

Re: The PaaS Spectrum: Choosing Your Coding Cloud

jamesurquhart — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:18:57 -0000

Heroku is actually very cool. It falls squarely in the category of "Productivity/Ease of Operation", but there are a few Ruby PaaS providers out there, so perhaps not as "far right" as some.

Re: Cracks in the Clouds, but the Sky Ain't Fallin'

jamesurquhart — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 03:50:04 -0000

Point well taken, and thank you. Fixed now.

Re: What the hell is going on with the Cloud Computing group on Google?

jamesurquhart — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:19:12 -0000

Jeremy,

You caught me on Sam's stats. I didn't do my homework there, and I'll update to reflect that. However, that just means he is in the top 2% of members, not the top 1%.

Everyone promotes their stuff on that list. I'm not with a product company, so I'm not pushing product, but I certainly used my blog as post fodder (and more rarely did the reverse). So did Reuven, botchagalupe, etc., etc., etc.

Finally, I have no desire to take over anything. I thought I was a part of a community, with a certain level of community self policing. I was wrong. I can't speak for Sam.

However, you and Reuven are right about one thing. I can take my discussions elsewhere.

James

Re: Cisco's Nexus 1000v and the Cloud: Is it really a big deal?

jamesurquhart — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 03:20:01 -0000

See! I knew there were some very cloud-smart people working on that project!

Re: Cisco's Nexus 1000v and the Cloud: Is it really a big deal?

jamesurquhart — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 03:18:02 -0000

I will update the post to reflect this. I am unfortunately unable to make VMWorld this year, but I'd love to get a demo sometime. Send me an email at jurquhart at yahoo dot com.

Re: Update: The Cloud Computing Bill of Rights

jamesurquhart — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:24:21 -0000

Thanks, Sam. I'm excited to see this happening. I look forward to reviewing the draft, and I encourage others to do so.

James

Re: Cloud Computing and the Constitution

jamesurquhart — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:26:11 -0000

Excellent question. I'm just getting to know this issue and the associated laws. I'd welcome comments from anyone with applicable expertise, but I plan on hunting down an answer either way.

Re: Why Every Linux Application Known To Man Will Be SaaS Soon

jamesurquhart — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:09:09 -0000

Ah, but that $75 includes infrastructure, which would cost for a single tenant app whether directly owned or via hosting providers. When looking at this as a service alone, single tenant may be untenable (without automation to save $$ where possible). However, if comparing to the cost of hosting the same application on the same quality and quantity of resources yourself (or via dedicated hosting), it doesn't look quite so bad.

Good point, though. Most people will quickly look at an app hosted in the cloud as a service, not necessarily an instance of a license.

James

Re: Update: The Cloud Computing Bill of Rights

jamesurquhart — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:26:12 -0000

Technically, data encryption is certainly one piece of the security puzzle. (I'm not so sure it directly relates to privacy, per se.) It certainly seems possible for a vendor to provide an interface to allow customers to encrypt their own data, though the support of such a function might expose the vendor to liability.

However, I am much more worried about the political and legal threats to security and privacy than the technical ones.

James

Re: The Cloud Computing Bill of Rights

jamesurquhart — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:27:27 -0000

Excellent point!

It fits with my theory of Follow the Law computing (see http://blog.jamesurquhart.com/2008/06/follow-la...). Organizations will leverage the geographic distribution of cloud systems and the ability to migrate running processes (or code flows) from server to server to develop applications that move to wherever the regulatory environment is best for a given task.

But, whether or not that vision plays out, regulatory adherence is, in the end, the customer's problem, not the vendor's. The vendor's responsibility is, as you say, to provide the tools and metrics to assure that compute loads and data exist physically where you want them to.

Re: The Cloud Computing Bill of Rights

jamesurquhart — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 19:51:39 -0000

Thanks, John. I'll certainly take a look at geek-pac. I'm beginning to feel this is an important policy issue to debate.

Your point about rights of termination (in your brief statement linked above) is critical, and I missed it entirely.